Dirkje C Zondag, Tamar M van Haaren-Ten Haken, Pien M Offerhaus, Eveline Mestdagh, Hubertina C J Scheepers, Marianne J Nieuwenhuijze
{"title":"为荷兰孕产妇护理专业人员验证分娩信念量表。","authors":"Dirkje C Zondag, Tamar M van Haaren-Ten Haken, Pien M Offerhaus, Eveline Mestdagh, Hubertina C J Scheepers, Marianne J Nieuwenhuijze","doi":"10.1080/0167482X.2024.2392160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To validate the Birth Beliefs Scale (BBS) for maternity care professionals by testing: (1) content validity; (2) internal reliability; (3) known-group discriminant validity; and examine potential relationships between regions and birth beliefs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>First, content validity was tested. Before distribution of the questionnaire among maternity care professionals of six maternity care networks (MCNs), adjustments in the statements were made whenever content validity was too low. Data were collected from November 2022 to March 2023. Statistical analysis was performed using Cronbach's alpha, ANOVA and regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Based on the content validity-test, item 6 of the questionnaire was adjusted before distribution. In total, 199 maternity care professionals completed the questionnaire. A good internal reliability of the BBS was found. There was a significant difference between the different disciplines for the BBS-Med subscale (<i>p</i> < .001), and the BBS-Nat subscale (<i>p</i> < .001). For the BBS-Nat subscale, the factors work experience and MCN were significant in the regression analysis, with interaction on the association between BBS-Nat and discipline.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The BBS is a valid instrument to measure birth beliefs among maternity care professionals. The BBS can help to create awareness within professionals of their beliefs and may help to explain practice variation in childbirth.</p>","PeriodicalId":50072,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology","volume":"45 1","pages":"2392160"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the Birth Beliefs Scale for maternity care professionals in The Netherlands.\",\"authors\":\"Dirkje C Zondag, Tamar M van Haaren-Ten Haken, Pien M Offerhaus, Eveline Mestdagh, Hubertina C J Scheepers, Marianne J Nieuwenhuijze\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0167482X.2024.2392160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To validate the Birth Beliefs Scale (BBS) for maternity care professionals by testing: (1) content validity; (2) internal reliability; (3) known-group discriminant validity; and examine potential relationships between regions and birth beliefs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>First, content validity was tested. Before distribution of the questionnaire among maternity care professionals of six maternity care networks (MCNs), adjustments in the statements were made whenever content validity was too low. Data were collected from November 2022 to March 2023. Statistical analysis was performed using Cronbach's alpha, ANOVA and regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Based on the content validity-test, item 6 of the questionnaire was adjusted before distribution. In total, 199 maternity care professionals completed the questionnaire. A good internal reliability of the BBS was found. There was a significant difference between the different disciplines for the BBS-Med subscale (<i>p</i> < .001), and the BBS-Nat subscale (<i>p</i> < .001). For the BBS-Nat subscale, the factors work experience and MCN were significant in the regression analysis, with interaction on the association between BBS-Nat and discipline.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The BBS is a valid instrument to measure birth beliefs among maternity care professionals. The BBS can help to create awareness within professionals of their beliefs and may help to explain practice variation in childbirth.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"2392160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0167482X.2024.2392160\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0167482X.2024.2392160","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Validation of the Birth Beliefs Scale for maternity care professionals in The Netherlands.
Objectives: To validate the Birth Beliefs Scale (BBS) for maternity care professionals by testing: (1) content validity; (2) internal reliability; (3) known-group discriminant validity; and examine potential relationships between regions and birth beliefs.
Methods: First, content validity was tested. Before distribution of the questionnaire among maternity care professionals of six maternity care networks (MCNs), adjustments in the statements were made whenever content validity was too low. Data were collected from November 2022 to March 2023. Statistical analysis was performed using Cronbach's alpha, ANOVA and regression analysis.
Results: Based on the content validity-test, item 6 of the questionnaire was adjusted before distribution. In total, 199 maternity care professionals completed the questionnaire. A good internal reliability of the BBS was found. There was a significant difference between the different disciplines for the BBS-Med subscale (p < .001), and the BBS-Nat subscale (p < .001). For the BBS-Nat subscale, the factors work experience and MCN were significant in the regression analysis, with interaction on the association between BBS-Nat and discipline.
Conclusions: The BBS is a valid instrument to measure birth beliefs among maternity care professionals. The BBS can help to create awareness within professionals of their beliefs and may help to explain practice variation in childbirth.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology was founded in 1982 in order to provide a scientific forum for obstetricians, gynecologists, psychiatrists and psychologists, academic health professionals as well as for all those who are interested in the psychosocial and psychosomatic aspects of women’s health. Another of its aims is to stimulate obstetricians and gynecologists to pay more attention to this very important facet of their profession.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
